What are the pillars of modern baseball statistics?

[BRobinsonfan]

22 hours ago, Greg Pappas said:

As I age (58) I discover more and more sites with more and more stats, like BaseballReference and Fangraphs and just today, Statcast.  It can be a bit overwhelming at times.  Some sites use the same stats, like WAR, but have different results.  Using hitting as an example, these are the stats I pay attention to (most often at BaseballReference): BA/HR/RBI/BABIP/OBP/SLG/OPS/OPS+/SB/BB's/K's/WAR.  That's 12 and seems like a lot.  LOL

Anyway, which stats are your 'go to' stats? I'm hoping you all may share those, in helping to figure out the ones I/we should be paying to. Naturally I'm asking for both hitting and pitching.

 

I think we can all agree on the basics. 

Giving % - Much better to have someone giving 110% than dogging it at 100% or, god forbid, 95%

Vetranisity % - More is better

Good Baseball Name Quotient - Tough sounding/syllables (Gunnar Henderson a lock for HOF)

[Number5]

4 minutes ago, BRobinsonfan said:

I think we can all agree on the basics. 

Giving % - Much better to have someone giving 110% than dogging it at 100% or, god forbid, 95%

Vetranisity % - More is better

Good Baseball Name Quotient - Tough sounding/syllables (Gunnar Henderson a lock for HOF)

You forgot good-looking girlfriend.

[BRobinsonfan]

20 hours ago, Alasdaire said:

Don't you at least think some players are chokers like @Malike said? It seems perfectly plausible to me that some people are more resilient to increased stress than others. Now which stat measures that is another story.

Give some examples of how you define "clutch" and who you think is "clutch."  It's pretty much all measurable.  

[BRobinsonfan]

18 hours ago, Alasdaire said:

This is broscience, but some guys might actually rely on the adrenaline that comes with high-pressure situation in order to be motivated/focused enough to produce. Like people in academic/professional settings who can't get anything done until they're pressed right up against a looming deadline. If there's any truth to that, you could also see a flip side where some players don't know how to properly deal with the adrenaline increase.

It's most interesting to me because it's something that people who play the game reference all of the time. Palmer cites RISP all the time during broadcasts. Part of that is because he's from another era and does still mention stuff like pitchers' wins. But when Grayson first came up, multiple younger players were talking about how he had a penchant for clamping down when things got sticky. Seems real to them.

Yeah, but isn't it funny how the guys who are "clutch" are always players that are normally high-level performers?  

[DrungoHazewood]

1 hour ago, BRobinsonfan said:

I think we can all agree on the basics. 

Giving % - Much better to have someone giving 110% than dogging it at 100% or, god forbid, 95%

Vetranisity % - More is better

Good Baseball Name Quotient - Tough sounding/syllables (Gunnar Henderson a lock for HOF)

What is Hayden Penn up to these days?

[btdart20]

6 minutes ago, DrungoHazewood said:

What is Hayden Penn up to these days?

Filming the next Scream movie, I think is what I heard.

[Tryptamine]

I'd say the the most important realization of modern statistics is that no one stat on its own is ever reliable. You always need to look at various underlying statistics to support the validity of it. fWAR by itself is a nice, kind of all in one number, but it's not predictive and it's highly variable so, while it's the best we have, even it is not a great all encompassing stat. For me, when I'm looking at a hitter I check a few things

 

SOFT%

MED%

HARD%

LD%

FB%

GB%

PULL%

Cent%

OPPO%

0-SWING%

Z-SWING%

Exit Velocity Avg

Exit Velocity Max

ETC, etc.

 

 

It's not enough to just look at babip any more, just like we learned that it's not enough to looking at batting average in the decade before it. People may look at a .250 babip and assume that a batter was unlucky, but if they hit an extreme amount of flyballs, it's only natural they would carry a lower babip than a player who hits more LDs.  So .250 may actually be a reasonable expectation for that hitter. 

[Just Regular]

I don't understand how we're on Page 5 without The Will to Win having been mentioned.

WAA, or WAR per 162 games are two I like since WAR itself is a counting stat and players on weaker Clubs sometimes get reps to compile "3.5 WAR in a 2-year period"* when if they were on a better team they might not get to play much at all.

xwOBA is nice in that it can be generated the same for Arms (what they yield) and Bats (what they produce).

Felix Bautista's .208 xwOBA today is 2nd to Paul Sewald's .203.    Hader is 3rd, and Bednar 6th.    Those guys have basically made "All MLB Bats" perform like the worst backup catchers.

*Irvin, OAK, 2021-2022

[NCRaven]

2 hours ago, DrungoHazewood said:

What is Hayden Penn up to these days?

Didn't he play Anakin Skywalker in the Star Wars prequel trilogy?

[BRobinsonfan]

3 hours ago, DrungoHazewood said:

What is Hayden Penn up to these days?

I see your Hayden Penn and raise you one Jennings Poindexter.  https://www.baseball-reference.com/players/p/poindje01.shtml

[Baltimorecuse]

The Oriole's stats do not support their record.  

[BRobinsonfan]

6 minutes ago, Baltimorecuse said:

The Oriole's stats do not support their record.  

You're not wrong.  Their Pythagorean record is 55-45.  Hyde must be doing a few things right.  

[Tryptamine]

1 minute ago, BRobinsonfan said:

You're not wrong.  Their Pythagorean record is 55-45.  Hyde must be doing a few things right.  

It's kind of funny actually, how big the variances are

Orioles +49  62-38

Cubs +41  48-51

[Number5]

10 minutes ago, BRobinsonfan said:

You're not wrong.  Their Pythagorean record is 55-45.  Hyde must be doing a few things right.  

I don't support Pythag as being very meaningful.  The idea that somehow a 16-3 loss somehow outweighs five or six 4-2 wins makes no sense to me.  Give me the team that wins the close ones.

[Can_of_corn]

5 minutes ago, Number5 said:

I don't support Pythag as being very meaningful.  The idea that somehow a 16-3 loss somehow outweighs five or six 4-2 wins makes no sense to me.  Give me the team that wins the close ones.

That isn't what it's trying to say.

It's that, over the course of a season, teams that outscore their opponents tend to win more games, and the greater the difference in scoring, the greater the difference in record.

In general it's an accurate premise.  That doesn't mean it works with every specific case.